- Details
Company's US patents are now being challenged. Report: Claire Robinson
The European Patent Office (EPO) has revoked an EU patent held by Impossible Foods, maker of the Impossible Burger. In the US, Impossible's fake meat products are manufactured with GMO yeast-derived soy leghemoglobin, a controversial ingredient that makes the fake meat look as if it's bleeding, like undercooked real meat, and that we have argued may not be safe to eat.
Following the EPO's decision, another fake meat company, Motif FoodWorks, has filed a suite of new petitions with the US Patent and Trademark Office challenging US patents held by Impossible Foods over the use of heme proteins (such as that present in soy leghemoglobin) in meat alternatives, as it defends itself against Impossible's accusations of patent infringement, according to Food Navigator USA.
Fake meat industry "a flop"
The news about Impossible's patent fights comes in the wake of an article by Bloomberg describing the rapid decline in the fake meat industry, which it branded "a flop". The article is titled, "Fake meat was supposed to save the world. It became just another fad".
Impossible shares, the article said, are currently trading at around $12 – about half the price during its last fundraising round. And more recently Bloomberg has reported that Impossible is preparing to lay off about 20% of its staff, following another round of cuts in October when about 6% of its staff got laid off.
The latest patent wars will only add to the industry's woes.
Impossible patents
Motif FoodWorks said that many of the claimed inventions in Impossible's patents are obvious and already disclosed in prior art, which means they cannot be patented. Motif added that the EPO's decision to revoke Impossible's patent "affirms our belief that Impossible's patents are invalid and never should have been issued in the first place".
Impossible Foods told Food Navigator USA that its plans to launch its full range of products in the EU have not changed. Its soy leghemoglobin "fake blood" product is currently being evaluated for EU use by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
The EPO-revoked patent is not on soy leghemoglobin itself. It is a broad patent on food products containing iron complexes such as heme-containing proteins, combined with flavour precursor molecules.
Twisted logic
The EPO's reasoning has not yet been published online, but GMWatch has long argued that GMO developers cannot tell patent offices that their product is novel, non-obvious, and has an inventive step – all requirements for a patented invention – yet tell regulators and the public that the same product is natural, nature-mimicking, or able to arise in nature or from natural breeding. The GMO developers can't have it both ways; if one of these statements is true, the other must be false. If it's patented, it can't be natural, and if it's natural, it can't be patented.
The UK government is currently deregulating a subclass of GMOs that it claims could have arisen through "traditional processes". Earlier drafts used the wording "natural processes", but government amendments changed "natural" to "traditional". It is possible that the change of wording is intended to avoid GMO developers running into difficulties with patent offices over whether their products are genuine inventions.
The opposition to the EU patent, filed by the law firm Reiser & Partner Patentwälte mbB in Germany, alleges that Impossible's claimed invention is not novel, lacks an inventive step, fails to sufficiently describe the invention, and extends beyond the application as originally filed.
However, a spokesman for Impossible Foods told Food Navigator USA that the EPO's decision was not made on the basis of lack of novelty and that the review compared Impossible's patent against its own prior invention. The spokesman is not quoted as addressing the alleged lack of inventive step.
Impossible is appealing against the EPO's decision.
GMWatch will update readers on the reasoning of the EPO, once it is published, and its potential relevance to GMOs that are claimed to be natural or nature-mimicking.
GMO-using fake meat company Impossible Foods' EU patent revoked (gmwatch.org)
- Details
A Global Forum highlighting the UN’s Decade of Family Farming (UNDFF) got underway on Monday, aimed at identifying priority policies to boost support for family farmers and agricultural development worldwide.
FAO Director-General QU Dongyu, pointed out in his video address to the Global Forum’s opening that the world is moving backwards in its efforts to eliminate hunger and malnutrition.
Growing hunger
He said the number of people facing hunger increased in 2021, and it risks rising further especially among the most vulnerable, of which almost 80 percent live in rural areas and are small-scale, family farmers.
Family farmers around the world are also subject to the new challenges to food systems everywhere, created by the climate crisis, as well as conflict. The war in Ukraine has added further pressure, to already fragile agrifood systems, UN agencies said.
Mr. QU said the forum provides a way, firstly, to discuss “the unique role of family farmers in transforming our agrifood systems; two, take stock of achievements and challenges in the implementation of the UN Decade; and three, strengthen collaboration to ensure global food security, enhance livelihoods and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals”.
80 percent
"Family farmers need to be at the centre of efforts to transform agrifood systems if we are to make real progress towards ending hunger," Mr. Qu said.
He added that “family farming is the main form of agriculture in both developed and developing countries and is responsible for producing 80 percent of the world's food,” in terms of value.
Family struggle
He noted that often, these family farmers struggle to feed their own families.
Since its launch three years ago, the UN Decade of Family Farming has been promoting integrated policies and investments to support family farmers, and FAO has been assisting national implementation of international tools and guidelines to strengthen family farming, Mr. Qu told the virtual forum.
He also noted that FAO hosts the Family Farming Knowledge Platform to facilitate the exchange of experience, innovation and specialised knowledge.
In addition, the FAO Strategic Framework 2022-31 includes a priority area of work aimed at better supporting small-scale food producers and delivering concrete results.
Push for the future
The main objectives of the Global Forum are to provide a general overview of policy trends and the relevance of family farming to the global push towards reaching the Sustainable Development Goals; highlight the main outcomes of the first three years of implementation; and re-orient the UNDFF agenda through the practical lessons learned so far.
Participants include representatives from national governments, governmental agencies, UN agencies, family farmers and their organizations, civil society organizations, as well as NGOs; the private sector, the media and academia.
- Details
The Regulatory Authority accused Belco yesterday of deliberately misleading the public about emissions from its North Power Station.
The RA, in a public statement, said that senior representatives at Belco had “made concerted efforts to misinform the public” and that a representative had been “selective” about what information was shared.
“The representative openly stated that their plant was supposed to burn natural gas, not what it is burning today,” the RA said. “They further assert that this is the genesis of the problems they are facing with respect to the plant and soot emissions.”
The RA said that in 2017, Belco had said that it had a “dire need” to build the NPS, which would be a dual-fuel plant capable of using oil or liquefied natural gas.
“Belco suggested that oil would be deployed in the first instance and if at some point in the future the country decided to go towards LNG, the plant could then be readily updated to switch to the LNG.
“The RA requested further information from Belco, and based on all the information received from Belco the RA approved Belco’s proposal in its entirety for $118 million to build the NPS and their battery system. No modifications were made to their proposal, and therefore the RA expected that Belco would deliver what it promised.
“Yet, after receiving permission from the RA, Belco built the North Power Station to optimise LNG first. It made the decision based on its assumption that the public and the RA would readily accept liquefied natural gas for energy generation at that time.
“However, when the RA conducted several public consultations on the Integrated Resource Plan proposal, which Belco created, and several alternative generation proposals from the public, there was little support for LNG.”
The statement added that the RA took no position regarding the safety of LNG in Bermuda, and that “any representations that the RA provided erroneous information to the public regarding the safety aspects of natural gas are incorrect”.
“The RA advises that if the issue is that the Belco plant was configured for natural gas and now has been retrofitted for liquid fuels, which is still problematic, Belco should address technical issues and mechanical issues with the vendor and hold them accountable to make the necessary repairs as a matter of urgency,” the statement continued.
“Finally, the RA cautions Belco about making any further misleading statements to the public regarding the NPS. If it continues to do so, the RA will consider all options available to it.”
Wayne Caines, a government MP who became Belco president in December 2020, said that Belco was committed to reducing emissions and adopting alternative energy.
He added that natural gas was on the table as a substitute but ruled out under the Regulatory Authority’s Integrated Resource Plan.
“When planning for the North Power Station, the intention was to use natural gas as a fuel, but the Integrated Resource Plan process eliminated natural gas as a fuel source,” he said.
A spokesman for the Ministry of Home Affairs said that the matter was one for the RA.
However, he added: “It should be noted that any approval must be consistent with the integrated resource plan published in 2019.
“The IRP does not mention LNG. Furthermore, LNG is not the preferred choice of power generation for Bermuda’s future.”'
- Details
Bermuda’s greenhouse gas emissions need to reduce 60% by 2030 to align with international efforts to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees centigrade. If warming exceeds this level, the risks of ocean acidification along with several other environmental threats to the island can increase significantly. It is also important to acknowledge the fact that there are communities surrounding our existing electricity generating power plant that continue to endure health, property and environmental challenges due to their proximity to fossil fuel smokestacks. Addressing this should be a matter of national interest and attempts to find solutions should be pursued with urgency.
In light of these realities, Greenrock is working hard to produce the data and research required to accelerate the deployment of affordable renewable energy. Of the various renewable technologies available to Bermuda, offshore wind and solar have consistently been identified as the most mature renewable energy technologies that are suitable to achieve this goal.
Greenrock welcomes the progress that has been made to date, by the Bermuda Government and the Regulatory Authority, in considering offshore wind as a key potential element of a sustainable, low carbon energy system for Bermuda. We now seek to build on this work and accelerate progress through working with a UK based engineering company, BVG Associates (BVGA), who have over a decade of expertise in delivering offshore wind.
Working with BVGA, we have identified a series of studies, which are now instrumental in progressing an offshore wind project in Bermuda:
- An independent review of work carried out to date, including a comparison with offshore wind industry good practice, and the identification of priority actions required to help understand if offshore wind is viable for Bermuda
- A detailed cost of energy assessment, to determine with confidence the likely range of costs for electricity that could be delivered by an offshore wind farm in Bermuda
- Modeling of Bermuda's electricity system, to understand the combination of technologies that will be required to deliver an affordable, reliable and low-carbon electricity supply that contains large amounts of intermittent renewable energy
- Industry standard wind resource assessment
- Industry standard spatial assessments, to complement existing work being done in this area
- An offshore wind roadmap, outlining step-by-step how an operational offshore wind farm can be delivered in Bermuda
- If the outcome of these studies is successful, Greenrock also plans to initiate a revenue-grade (Light Detection and Ranging) LIDAR wind data collection campaign
- These studies will help to determine if offshore wind is technically and commercially feasible for Bermuda, how much electricity from offshore wind is likely to cost, and assuming it is feasible they will also outline how Bermuda can deploy offshore wind in line with industry good practice.
We are pleased to announce that the first of these studies has now been completed, and is available on our website for key stakeholders and the general public to review. To review the study or find more information about the work we are doing around offshore wind, please visit our website www.greenrock.org.
This important work is only possible thanks to the tireless efforts of our active members, private contributions from our community, and generous donations from sponsors in the private sector. We would like to thank everyone who has contributed to making this work possible, and also to make it known that sponsorship opportunities are now available for the remaining reports and studies. This will help provide the continued financial support required to complete this work.
For all those interested in learning more about this initiative, Greenrock will be hosting an open forum in the BUEI Auditorium from 12pm - 2pm on Friday, July 22 featuring Director Chris Worboys and the Offshore Wind Experts that have been commissioned from BVG Associates. The goal of the forum is to discuss the data from the study that has been completed, present initial results from the second study exploring the cost of energy from offshore wind, answer questions about the project, explain how this research initiative can be used to accelerate renewable energy deployment in Bermuda, and share information about the funding required to complete the studies that have been planned in a timely fashion.
For questions about this statement or to arrange an interview to discuss this initiative further please call 441.747.7625 or email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
- Details
The Bermuda Underwater Exploration Institute [BUEI], Keep Bermuda Beautiful [KBB], Greenrock, and the Bermuda National Trust are offering their thoughts on Earth Day 2022, which is set to be observed on Friday [April 22]...Continued [here]
Greenrock
Every little bit counts when it comes to a charity like Greenrock!
Donations help us fund the day-to-day operations of the organisation, allowing us to maintain our existing programmes while exploring new programmes for the future.
© 2018 Greenrock Bermuda | All Rights Reserved | Web Design & Development